Comments on: Cliff Lee Revisted Again http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/ Daily baseball statistical analysis and commentary Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:03:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Tom Au http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-36024 Tom Au Sat, 21 Jun 2008 17:14:22 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-36024 This is an example of why I give primary weight to FIP (or what I call sabermetric ERA) in judging a pitcher rather than posted ERA. In 2004, Boston's Derek Lowe had a 5.42 ERA with a FIP around 4.00. So LA's Paul de Podesta traded for him after his "bad" season, and got a pitcher with a 3.61 ERA in 2005. This is an example of why I give primary weight to FIP (or what I call sabermetric ERA) in judging a pitcher rather than posted ERA. In 2004, Boston’s Derek Lowe had a 5.42 ERA with a FIP around 4.00. So LA’s Paul de Podesta traded for him after his “bad” season, and got a pitcher with a 3.61 ERA in 2005.

]]> By: Dave Cameron http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35971 Dave Cameron Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:45:01 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35971 Good catch, David. Considering my obsession with GB%, you'd think that would be something I'd have noticed, but it slipped through the cracks. I agree, though, that dramatic changes in GB/FB rates tend to be very indicative of a real change in approach, and it's definitely a real data point that his GB% has jumped so significantly. Good catch, David. Considering my obsession with GB%, you’d think that would be something I’d have noticed, but it slipped through the cracks. I agree, though, that dramatic changes in GB/FB rates tend to be very indicative of a real change in approach, and it’s definitely a real data point that his GB% has jumped so significantly.

]]> By: David Appelman http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35969 David Appelman Fri, 20 Jun 2008 19:05:20 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35969 Dave, not sure if you mentioned this in one of your previous posts (probably have), but did you notice Lee has turned himself into a groundball pitcher? If anything I think this signals a real change, and I believe GB/FB rates tend to be significant very early on. Dave, not sure if you mentioned this in one of your previous posts (probably have), but did you notice Lee has turned himself into a groundball pitcher? If anything I think this signals a real change, and I believe GB/FB rates tend to be significant very early on.

]]> By: Dave Cameron http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35967 Dave Cameron Fri, 20 Jun 2008 18:49:51 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35967 In the initial post, the performance that was furthest out of line from his pitch data was the walk rate. We have seen regression in the walk rate as expected, but he's canceled some of the loss there with the jump in strikeout rate. Is it sustainable? Probably not, but as he continues to pitch well, we need to expect the regression to be less severe than earlier. In the initial post, the performance that was furthest out of line from his pitch data was the walk rate. We have seen regression in the walk rate as expected, but he’s canceled some of the loss there with the jump in strikeout rate. Is it sustainable? Probably not, but as he continues to pitch well, we need to expect the regression to be less severe than earlier.

]]> By: NadavT http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35957 NadavT Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:33:47 +0000 http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/cliff-lee-revisted-again/#comment-35957 In your first Cliff Lee post, you said that his underlying pitch data (as shown at baseballreference.com) didn't support his drastic improvement in core performance. If he really figured out how to pitch better, we'd probably see a big swing in his baseballreference.com pitch data, but at the time his strike percentages were essentially the same as in previous years, indicating that he was just getting better results from the same underlying performance. Through May and June, however, his overall pitch data hasn't really changed -- he's still not missing too many bats and is depending on called strikeouts more than the average pitcher. Does that suggest that his ability to get called strikeouts using precise control is a sustainable skill, or do you still expect his core pitching stats to regress, based on his pitch data? In your first Cliff Lee post, you said that his underlying pitch data (as shown at baseballreference.com) didn’t support his drastic improvement in core performance. If he really figured out how to pitch better, we’d probably see a big swing in his baseballreference.com pitch data, but at the time his strike percentages were essentially the same as in previous years, indicating that he was just getting better results from the same underlying performance.

Through May and June, however, his overall pitch data hasn’t really changed — he’s still not missing too many bats and is depending on called strikeouts more than the average pitcher. Does that suggest that his ability to get called strikeouts using precise control is a sustainable skill, or do you still expect his core pitching stats to regress, based on his pitch data?

]]>